4 ms·
What the article completely misses is that cost of bad hire is just as high for the employee as it is for the company. Particularly fire "fast" option, for the
by TrainedMonkey 13y ago
What the article completely misses is that cost of bad hire is just as high for the employee as it is for the company.
Particularly fire "fast" option, for the employees next job it raises uncomfortable questions of why. So the goal is to not hire bad people. If you did hire a person, own it up and provide them with close performance feedback. Fire people if you have to, but not before they had at least few chances to improve their behavior and were clearly communicated as to what is going to happen if they do not.
- memracom 13y agoRight. Therefore it is better for both the employee and the employer that you fire people in the first few days if you do not feel comfortable with the worker. The employee can just continue their job hunt, and you will not spend so much on getting clear on the fact that this person does not fit. And if a few days strikes you as being too short, then try a week or two. Personally the only time I fired someone that was just not suited, was after two weeks. But in thinking back on it, I already knew this aftera few days, just needed some time, and some conversations with the employee to convince myself. Of course, part of that decision was that the conversations did not lead to improvements, but the important take away is to act fast on your hunches. If you don't trust yourself to fire someone after 3 days then at least set up some tests that will provide you with the data to know whether or not the employee will work out. It is better for everybody that way.
- TrainedMonkey 13y agoIf after few days you can tell employee is not a good fit, maybe the problem is your hiring process?